READER L McGregor (Letters, October 1) wrongly asserts that mess and litter left at Bannockburn must have cost quite a bit to clear up and make it fit for visitors next day. As organiser of the Annual Bannockburn Rally, I categorically refute every word of these claims. The stewards under experienced Chief Steward, Keir McKechnie, were well organised to make several sweeps with bin bags. Appeals were made from the platforms, despite L McGregor’s claims to the contrary.

Since the SNP gave up their traditional annual event, the cross-party Scottish Republican Socialist Movement (SRSM) fought to maintain continuity in the face of Labour’s Public Order Act and hostility from other Unionist bodies. We booked the rally with Stirling Council and now Police Scotland, Bannockburn Heritage Centre and various local departments – plus recently the NHS, who wanted to charge us privately for ambulances on standby.

We always booked the rally under the name of “Bannockburn Commemoration Committee”, to make the rally all-inclusive and all welcoming, to gain maximum support and keep the annual event alive. This year, we had the support and cooperation of All Under One Banner, who helped to make it a massive event. The Chief Officer told me on the rally that the police helicopter estimated 20,000, marching, with more joining on the way. I estimate that already on the Bannockburn site their must have been another 5,000 or so awaiting the marchers.

We had many minuted meetings with police, council and various officials representing legal, transport, licensing, health and safety, NHS, fire services etc, plus many phone calls and emails. Police Scotland had a sergeant and PC as liaison officers, who were more than helpful and professional. They helped walk the route twice in advance to assist us through a logistical nightmare of several sets of roadworks, a bridge demolition, a motorway exit blockage and a railway station closure. We have even planned three possible, accepted, improved routes through the town next year and have all accepted with no expectations of roadworks, volcanoes, earthquakes, natural disasters or acts of English gods or hostile anti-Scottish heritage societies.

We had a minuted post-mortem meeting with all the aforementioned officials, where the Local Bannockburn Heritage NTS Centre claimed that there was litter left, plus (political) complaints from the Conservative Party and local Orange Order. This was strongly refuted by the four continuity SRSM representatives, police and all the council officials present. I would therefore ask L McGregor’s interest and sources for their assertions and allegations?

Yesterday’s National also reported that the “500 Miles” walkers were denied a short access to Stirling Castle car park. By what right do these unelected heritage bodies make these blatant discriminatory political decisions? Who says public access must be denied on political arguments? What laws are they referring to? What is wrong with political rights and rallies?

Historic Environment Scotland is also applying bans to Saturday’s mass indy rally in our capital. Political precedents have already been set by huge miners’ rallies and galas etc. Logistical arguments are also annulled by the hugely successful clan gatherings, which I was privileged to attend. Stewards ably managed the logistics of catering and souvenir merchandise, speakers, entertainment, peddlers and licensed stalls. I heard no complaints of the political speeches of the diaspora clansfolk, just the political opinions of these supposed to administer these grounds on behalf of the Scottish people, who are being denied, by them, the right to political expression.

Donald Anderson
Glasgow

READ MORE: Letters, October 1

AS a long-time member of Historic Scotland (now HES) and a supporter of independence I was saddened to read of the perverse and questionable decision taken by HES to exclude independence activities from “its” lands.

However it strikes me that (conservatively) half of Scotland is in favour of independence and that, almost by definition, this half are more likely to be actively interested in matters Scottish and therefore members of HES. So it would not be surprising if a large minority or even a majority of the organisation’s current membership would be not be happy with the decisions currently being taken on their behalf.

I would urge all my fellow members to write to HES and complain, vociferously, AND not to resign – just yet.

As many politicians down south have failed to realise, it is far easier to change a policy you disagree with if you are a member than if you are not!

David Brackenbury
Fair Isle

READ MORE: Historic Environment Scotland refuses Yes walkers entry to Stirling Castle car park​

SHAME on Historic Environment Scotland for its behaviour and attitude to our 500 mile Yes walkers and to the wider Yes movement in general. Still, it considers Yes as a political movement and still, WE insist we’re not. How can we be when we attract people from all walks of life, political parties, assorted world religions and nations?

But to prevent a few photographs from being taken on the “esplanade”, or car park if you prefer, is a total disgrace and insult to those who had walked a good many miles to share their support for an independent Scotland.

And shame on the Scottish Government for refusing support by stating “it’s a matter for HES”.

Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife

SOUNDS like a jobsworth made a decision way above his pay grade. They will probably come to regret this in the coming days as subscribers cancel.

David Nicol
via thenational.scot